Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 6037180" data-attributes="member: 463">I agree, this is the best approach.1) A small number of NPCs are "PC type" and should be built like PCs, or simplified PCs. 4e falls down here in that you can't really make NPCs with the PC rules at all; PCs hit much harder and have fewer hp than do NPCs of equivalent power. 1e-2e is good here as PC rules are simple enough to be used for NPCs. With 3e it's painfully difficult to make high level NPCs 'correctly'.2) Most NPCs should have combat ability and skills entirely dissociated. 4e is much better than 3e here. Though IMO the 4e DMG advice goes too far into "don't stat friendly NPCs at all!" territory, it's easy enough in 4e to assign NPCs skill bonuses and ritual caster levels that are dissociated from combat ability, if any. With skills this is also easy in 1e, due to 1e not having a skills system, though the 1e DMG does not make it very clear that it's ok to arbitrarily assign NPCs hit dice, the only example I can think of are the 2 hd 'ruffians' in the city/town encounter table. 3e strongly discourages this approach and leads to madness such as systems for Commoners gaining levels (and thus hit dice & combat ability) just for living and working at their job.Having criticised 3e, I think it can work ok for low level campaigns. Where a +11 skill bonus is a big deal, then you can make a 1st level NPC 'legally' and make him an expert by giving him 4 skill ranks, +4 stat bonus, +3 for skill focus. Running Pathfinder recently in the 1-5 level range, again I've found that I can use feats and stat allocation to make competent 1st level NPC Commoners, Experts and Warriors. And that kind of number crunching is quite fun, sometimes. But it swiftly breaks down when you move away from 'almost everyone is 1st level', another reason for 3e/PF to stick to single-digit campaigns.</blockquote>

Verification